AE911Truth Shows Ideological Roots - Publishing in Republic Magazine

[Bolo Boffin]

The self-styled Voice of the Patriot Movement.

From AE911Truth's Twitter feed (yes! they have one of those!):

We are submitting an article of the evidence for controlled demolition to Republic Magazine, due to come out in September!

The most recent issue of Republic Magazine:

Talk of a Second American Revolution is spreading and we uncover the truth for you in Issue #15. Features include; The Founding Terrorists, Tea Parties: Not Just for Boston Anymore,The Comittees of Safety, Quelling the Rebellion, Ron Paul: Pillar in the Storm, Enemies of the State, Continental Congress 2009, Alter or Abolist: The Rights of the People, State of Independence: State Sovereignty, The Time is Now, Ron Paul on Seccession, A Call to Military & Police, Secret Congressional Meeting, What Can One Man Do?, I Am The People, Restoring America One County at a Time, 60 Second Activism, Constitutional Discipline and More…

All spellings are sic.

It's so nice to know that when I stand against AE911Truth and their bullshit about 9/11, I'm standing against people who scratch the backs of rightwing, fundie quasiterrorists...

...oh, that's a good description of Al Qaeda, isn't it? Except Al Qaeda aren't quasi. Hmmmmm....

[Ohio Joe]

1. Ron Paul nutters...

I'm shocked.

[procopia]

5. As opposed to

George Bush nutters.

[Ohio Joe]

10. Were they considering being bush nutters?

That would have been worse.

[procopia]

25. Guilt by association

The OP's logical fallacy works both ways.

[SDuderstadt]

2. Jesus....

Why are they publishing it there?

I sure "truthers" are really proud of this, huh, "truthers"?

[Bolo Boffin]

3. Why are they publishing it there?

They wanted it to be peer-reviewed?

[rollingrock]

4. Why did Obama go on Fox News for an interview?

is he a secret wing-nut neocon?

[SDuderstadt]

6. That's not even close....

It's going to be fun to watch the "truthers" try to defend this.

[rollingrock]

7. You're right

Fox News is far to the right of Republic Magazine. Not even close.

I have no idea what the OP's point is. The Republic Magazine is by no means a right-wing magazine or website. The issues it typically deals with are pretty typical of many other progressive websites on the internet.

[SDuderstadt]

8. WTF?

Are you fucking kidding?

[rollingrock]

9. No, are you? nt

[rollingrock]

11. There's nothing in the OP whatsoever

that indicates Republic Magazine is right-wing.

[Bolo Boffin]

12. You missed the part where they were sniffing Ron Paul's taint? n/t

[SDuderstadt]

13. Do you follow the link, dude?

Or, did you just spout off half-cocked?

[rollingrock]

15. Yeah, and this is what I found

Some articles from one of their back issues:


The Big Pharma Plague (A Solution You Need to Know),
The Right of Universal Healthcare
The Silenced Side of Aspartame
Common Sense on Hemp
10 Pillars of Alternative Cancer Treatments
The Truth About Air Purifiers
How to Avoid Brands Made with Genetically Modified Organisms (GM0s)
Achieving Optimal Health With Alternative Therapies and more…


Yeah, that sounds real right-wing to me. Scary stuff!

[Bolo Boffin]

19. You managed to skip over the Second Amendment issue. n/t

[SDuderstadt]

33. Nice cherrypicking, dude...

Why, no...that's not dishonest at all.

[OnTheOtherHand]

35. no, really, the clue phone is ringing

Maybe you're not real familiar with the "Patriot Movement." So here's a helpful excerpt from "The Universal Right of Healthcare":

Not only is Universal Healthcare not a right, it is also something we cannot afford as a nation. Every nation where Universal Healthcare has been implemented, it has been deemed a failure.

ETA: I scraped this from the Google cache, but as an alternative to downloading the whole damn thing, here is a Scribd version (this article starts on page 20). The graphic has a handy checklist:

__ Become a socialist health care system
__ Infringe on citizen's rights
__ Let people abuse the system
__ Endebt our nation even more

[Ohio Joe]

14. Issue #2 - Meet Ron Paul "Your Next President"

Everything on there seems to be talking points right from Ron Paul himself. Yeah... I guess I just have a different definition of progressive because I think Ron Paul is a douchebag without a progressive bone in his body. Have you looked at this site? Is this really what you consider to be progressive?

[rollingrock]

16. Progressives agree with Paul on a number of issues

so what?

[SDuderstadt]

17. WTF are you talking about????

Seriously. Are you a fan of Ron Paul?

[rollingrock]

18. Personally, I don't care for some of his politics

but then, I'm not dumb enough to think that I'm going to agree with someone on every single issue.

hell, I certainly don't agree with Obama on every single issue even though I voted for him, nor do I blindly accept everything Obama has ever said or done.

[Bolo Boffin]

21. You managed to not answer the question. n/t

[rollingrock]

23. You managed not to pay attention

congrats.

[Bolo Boffin]

26. Oh, I paid attention. You did a long-winded non-denial and fakeoff answer.

congrats.

[SDuderstadt]

22. Do you agree with Paul's...

anti-choice position?

How about his global warming denial?

[rollingrock]

39. Global warming denial?

Are you talking out of your ass again?



--------------------------


Ron Paul on global warming:

"Global temperatures have been warming since the Little Ice Age. Studies within the respectable scientific community have shown that human beings are most likely a part of this process. As a Congressman, I've done a number of things to support environmentally friendly policies. I have been active in the Green Scissors campaign to cut environmentally harmful spending, I've opposed foreign wars for oil, and I've spoken out against government programs that encourage development in environmentally sensitive areas, such as flood insurance."

"I strongly oppose the Kyoto treaty. Providing for a clean environment is an excellent goal, but the Kyoto treaty doesn't do that. Instead it's placed the burden on the United States to cut emissions while not requiring China - the world's biggest polluter - an other polluting third-world countries to do a thing. Also, the regulations are harmful for American workers, because it encourages corporations to move their business overseas to countries where the regulations don't apply. It's bad science, it's bad policy, and it's bad for America. I am more than willing to work cooperatively with other nations to come up with policies that will safeguard the environment, but I oppose all nonbinding resolutions that place an unnecessary burden on the United States."

http://pesn.com/2007/11/05/9500456_RonPaul_on_GlobalWarming/

[SDuderstadt]

41. No, dude...

you are. You should realize that people like Paul tailor their message to their audience. Paul makes it sound like he's an environmentalist to fool people like you. If he's really an environmentalist and an opponent of global warming, why in the world is he promoting the nonsense from the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine?

http://www.petitionproject.org/index.php

Why is he making statements like below:

http://www.ronpaul.com/2009-06-04/statement-on-global-warming-petition-signed-by-31478-scientists/

You've been duped, dude, but it would hardly be the first time, would it....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Petition

[Ohio Joe]

20. WTF?

I... don't even know what to say. I don't know any progressives that support Ron Paul, the ones I know think he is a douchebag. I am horrified to see even remote support for him here on DU.

[rollingrock]

24. Where did I say progressives supported Ron Paul?

I said progressives agree with him on a number of issues, which is a fact.

You must have been absent when they they were teaching reading comprehension in school, no?

[Ohio Joe]

31. Weasel it any way you want

You have made clear your support of Ron Paul. You have no business being here and for the first time I am going to use the ignore function. I come here to discuss with other liberals, Dems and progressive... I have nothing further to say to you.

[rollingrock]

40. Thank God

The idiology purity police are here to save the day!

Be afraid, be very afraid. lol.


:rofl:

[whatchamacallit]

27. Time to stop playing silly games

Do you believe most of your forum adversaries are not progressives? You label all of us as "truthers" and post endless crap about the right-wing underpinnings of the "truth movement". So what do you think, are we all a bunch of right-wingers as your posts are styled to suggest? Don't beat around the bush, state your fucking case.

[Bolo Boffin]

28. What a silly place for you to go.

Let's have a contest. You post any post here that implies you guys are rightwingers and I'll post 25 posts here that imply we are rightwingers...


...and we'll see who runs out of posts first.

[whatchamacallit]

29. Well strictly between you and I

I'll easily run out first.

[Bolo Boffin]

30. Thank you

I'm not posting that to imply that people here are rightwingers.

I'm posting that to let you know where you're getting your information from.

[SDuderstadt]

32. "are we all a bunch of right-wingers?"

I don't know of anyone who has made such a case. If i ever ran into someone saying such a thing, I would take them to task. But, as I have noted before, I am alarmed at some of the Anti-Fed, anti-government RW nonsense that is filtering into DU. I find the "no-planes", "controlled demolition", "mini-nukes took down the towers" particularly offensive and simply not progressive by any remote stretch of the imagination (which seems to be where most of their claims come from).

More importantly, I think a number of "truthers", JFK CT types as well as other CT types quite frankly, lack the reasoning skills to see the bullshit they're buying into. I believe that is very alarming. If you think I'm wrong, start following the work of Political Research Associates as they monitor the far right and notice how many of the same themes they find troubling on the right are bubbling into places like DU. For example, I have never met an "abolish the Fed" type here who even remotely understands what the Fed does and how it works. The fact that I have to go back and forth with them over such a simple issue as whether the Fed is an Independent Federal Agency (it is) and they cite "Momney as Debt" as evidence means they have no fucking idea what they are talking about.

I love for you to point to a single person here who has made the claim that all "truthers" are RWers.

[eomer]

34. If that's how idealogical roots are determined then AE911 must be schizo.

You're great at fitting a curve against one point. Now see if you can make some sense after you try to make it pass through all these data points:

Canada Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) is going to film us during our Harvard speaking engagement on 9/10/09 to include in their program!

Russia Today interview with AE911Truth

contd.. structural failure in modern history Russia Today interviews AE911Truth at the booth, great video clip

Met with staffers for:
Dennis Kucinich (D)
Pete Stark (D)
Ron Paul (R)
Chris Van Hollen (D)
Mitch McConnell (R)
Jim Himes (D)
Brian Baird (D)
Lloyd Doggett (D)
George Voinovich (R)

met with the state controller of Senator Feinstein's office

AE911Truth to speak Sat 8/15. in studio at KBDI PBS live pledge drive.

Local Fox TV affiilite KMPH in Fresno interviewed us after the presentation!

Great little 15 min "wide cov." radio interview today in Montreal- CKUT 90.3

Above are all snips from: http://twitter.com/AE911Truth

Pretty obviously, what they are is non-partisan with regard to getting their message out. Anyone who will listen, basically, seems to be their criterion.

[OnTheOtherHand]

37. yeah, I don't know what this has to do with "ideological roots"

I do think that the movement poses some interesting sociological issues, but not ones I can spend much time on. There might be grounds for them to ponder why they get a warmer reception in Republic than, say, Mother Jones, but it has no direct bearing on their arguments.

[reinvestigate911]

36. this is a stupid ploy and a logical fallacy. truth is nonpartisan.

what's that you say? nonpartisan??

yes... nonpartisan.
the desperation of the so-called "debunker" community is palpable.

[OnTheOtherHand]

38. sorry, this isn't desperation

They're pitching their arguments to the Patriot Movement, and it's sort of interesting to watch, certainly more interesting than the 2037th round of "What kind of fool-tool would believe that a plane hit the Pentagon?" (More interesting for me was watching someone try to convince -- himself? the rest of us? -- that Republic isn't a right-wing publication.)